- i65 - 



grain feed added materially to the milk yield, corn meal showing 

 the greatest increase ; but this gain did not nearly pay expenses." 



It seemed tons that the weak point in these experiments was in 

 the extreme shortness of the feeding periods, only one week, and 

 for this reason we determined to make our period so long that the 

 effect of continued grain feeding would be shown. Still our final 

 results were scarcely no favorable to the grain ration as Professor 

 Shelton's. 



While we received no return in milk and butter for the extra 

 grain fed, we should scarcely want to say that the grain was fed 

 at a I0.SS for two reasons, first, there must have been a considera- 

 ble saving in pasture, in other words we would have been able to 

 keep a larger number of cows in the same pasture. For we know 

 that a cow of rooo pounds weight, and this was about the average 

 weight of our cows, will consume when in full milk about twenty- 

 four pounds of dry matter per day, the four pounds of bran and 

 cotton-seed meal would furnish three and one lialf pounds of this 

 dry matter or fifteen per cent. That is if our pasture would have 

 maintained eight cows without grain feed, nine could have been 

 carried as well with the grain. Second the manurial value of the 

 grain at present prices of fodders and fertilizers, would go far 

 toward balancing its cost. Reckoning that eighty per cent of the 

 fertilizing value of the grain would be returned in the manure, and 

 in this case there would be no danger of loss from leaching or fer- 

 mentation, the fertilizing value of the two pounds of cotton-seed 

 meal and the two pounds of bran would be 3.2 cents and the cost 

 at 25 and 18 dollars per ton respectively would be 4.3 cents leav- 

 ing I.I cents per cow per day to be accounted for in saving of pas- 

 ture or increase of product. 



Conclusion. 



While all the data that we have so far go to show that it did 

 not pay us to give cows on good pasture a supplementary grain 

 ration, yet we do not feel that we have as yet sufficient data to 

 warrant us in recommending those who follow this practice to 

 give it up. So far as our results in butter are concerned, they are 

 so close as to be almost identical. It is quite possible that the 

 milk yield maj^ have been more influenced by the ''milking 

 habit" of the cows than by the grain fed. By milking habit we 

 mean the tendency that different cows have to milk for a longer or 



